Source collected by query parameter

[johnbilt]

Details

Currently at the Source level there is no filtering on the collected_by field.
When vendors are building systems which list content stored in TAMS then they are only looking for the Sources at the top of the content tree.
This PR is to add the ability to filter Sources (and Flows) to find the content which is not collected by another Source and therefore is the top level.

Jira Issue (if relevant)

Jira URL:

Related PRs

Where appropriate. Indicate order to be merged.

Submitter PR Checks

(tick as appropriate)

• PR completes task/fixes bug
• API version has been incremented if necessary
• ADR status has been updated, and ADR implementation has been recorded
• Documentation updated (README, etc.)
• PR added to Jira Issue (if relevant)
• Follow-up stories added to Jira

Reviewer PR Checks

(tick as appropriate)

• PR completes task/fixes bug
• Design makes sense, and fits with our current code base
• Code is easy to follow
• PR size is sensible
• Commit history is sensible and tidy

Info on PRs

The checks above are guidelines. They don't all have to be ticked, but they should all have been considered.

[samdbmg]

This looks good so far, and I think it makes sense to match across to Flows too. It's also useful for #173 because it gives you a way to find the collected Flows/Sources while querying by other things at the same time

[samdbmg]

The distinction kinda comes up for the role discussion in #173 - the query string parameter lets you search for more things, for example /flows?flows_collected_by_id=<uuid>&format=urn:x-nmos:format:video&codec=video/h264 which feels useful, while the flows/<uuid>/flow_collection is the canonical resource itself - you can edit it there

[samdbmg]

TSC 2026-05-01
Option 3 seems to be the preferred option here - @johnbilt will continue to write the associated spec change. Will tidy up the empty string behaviour in webhooks to match what is proposed here as well. Will also make it consistent across Sources and Flows.

[samdbmg]

TSC 2026-05-29
Current state is this has the ADR but no spec change yet - next step is to write up the spec change

[j616]

Nice work. One question and a couple of minor suggestions.

[samdbmg]

LGTM, as discussed (I've taken the liberty of slipping in a minor fix to a typo I introduced in #225 )

[samdbmg]

We discussed this on in #214 (comment) and the changes are non-functional history cleanup, so I'm going to go ahead and merge this